A judge ruled Monday that a Paulsboro woman was not entitled to keep more than two dozen small pigs, variations of the pot-bellied type, on her residential property.

Meanwhile, a Mantua family is making a case for the township to change its rule against keeping chickens in residential areas. No more than a “poultry” number of them, mind you, say, six or eight.

Florence Gruber plays with her pigs after a judge ruled that she must find a new home for the estimated 29 small breed pigs on her Lincoln Avenue property in Paulsboro May 7, 2012. (Staff Photo by Tim Hawk/Gloucester County Times)

How about some common-sense ordinance updates here?

Mark Caria, the attorney for Paulsboro resident Florence Gruber, has a point when he says that a borough ordinance that will require Gruber to find new homes for up to 29 pigs was established in 1937, well before pot-bellied pigs were popular as pets. Caria stated that Gruber’s pigs are not the standard-size ones the ordinance was meant to control.

Municipal Judge William Golden found that Gruber had violated the ordinance, agreeing with the local prosecutor that “a pig is a pig.”

The judge added, though, that the borough council is free to amend its ordinance to allow for pot-bellied pigs as pets. Which would be a good idea — as long as the ordinance stops at two or three pigs.

The chicken case is a bit different. While Gruber’s pigs are not intended to be anyone’s bacon, Barbara Grant and her family in Mantua want chickens at least partly for agricultural reasons. They include, of course, eggs, as well as manure that can be used for organic gardening.

The current ordinance says chickens are livestock that can only be on five acres or more. Much has been written lately about the joys of “urban” chicken ownership, but again, this may be a question of number. Eight chickens in a backyard coop can be noisy, and produce enough waste to be troublesome.

Our advice to township committee members is to tread carefully here, and watch their step.